By Heather Cameron
As voters went to the polls once again on 4th May for the local elections, six combined authorities in England saw directly-elected metro mayors chosen for the first time, as part of the government’s devolution agenda.
The six areas – Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, Greater Manchester, Liverpool City Region, the Tees Valley, the West of England and the West Midlands – account for almost 20% of the population of England. This means a third of the English population, including London, now have a directly-elected metro mayor.
Advocates of the role believe metro mayors have the potential to transform both local democracy and local economies. However, not everyone is as supportive.
What are directly-elected metro mayors and what are their responsibilities?
Directly-elected metro mayors are chairs of their area’s combined authority, elected by the local population. Their role involves working in partnership with the combined authority to exercise the powers and functions devolved by central government, set out in the local area’s devolution deal. In contrast to existing city mayors, who are also directly elected, or local council leaders who make decisions for, and on behalf of, their local authorities, metro mayors have the power to make decisions for whole city regions.
The devolved powers predominantly focus on strategic matters, including housing and planning, skills, transport and economic development, with the exception of Greater Manchester, which also has powers and funding related to criminal justice and health and social care. Each devolution deal is very much tailored to the local area however, so the combined authorities will have varying powers and budgets.
The aim of metro mayors is to support local economic growth, while providing greater democratic accountability.
While the government believes the role ensures clear accountability over devolved powers and funding, concerns have been voiced within local government itself about the accountability, effectiveness and necessity of the incoming combined authority mayors. And democratic support for the role has always been weak.
In terms of accountability, metro mayors will not be accountable to an elected assembly, as in London, but only to their cabinet made up of other council leaders. This, and their potentially wide-ranging powers have been highlighted as a concern in terms of “back-room stich-up deals being created between mayors and individual authorities“.
Their introduction has also been described as “potentially worrying” as the local people were never given the opportunity to have a say on the new roles and that, instead, they are products of ‘deals done behind closed doors between councillors and representatives of central government.’
It appears rather ironic that this proposal of greater devolution may actually reflect an imposition from central government of its own policies and desires on local government.
Nevertheless, the new metro mayors do enable greater local control over local matters and have been argued to represent the best chance yet of ensuring devolution is sustainable over time. It is also likely they will get increasing powers over time, as in London.
But the question remains whether they will facilitate local economic growth and help to re-balance the English economy.
Whether the new metro mayors will succeed in this aim or not, only time will tell. There has been little evidence of improved performance under elected mayors in England so far, although it has been suggested there is some evidence that their introduction has resulted in quicker and more transparent decision-making, that the mayor had a higher public profile, that the council was better at dealing with complex issues, and that there was improved relationships between partners.
Some of the successes of the London mayor have also been suggested to be an indication of the potential impact of the directly-elected mayor role.
As has recently been argued, their success, or otherwise, “should be judged on whether they improve prospects for the people who live in their city regions, stimulating growth and getting local public services working better”.
If you enjoyed reading this, you may also like our previous articles on devolution:
- Supercouncils: questions raised about new powers for England’s combined authorities
- Top down ‘devolution’ or a bold new era for local government? An update on the Cities and Local Government Devolution Bill
- Devolution, for and against: a tale of many cities
Follow us on Twitter to see what developments in public and social policy are interesting our research team.
You must be logged in to post a comment.